Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017/09/18 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session-1/ISt. Louis Park OFFICIAL MINUTES M I N N E S O T A CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 18, 2017 The meeting convened at 6:15 p.m Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Aline Mavity, Thom Miller, and Susan Sanger. Councilmember absent: Gregg Lindberg. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), City Clerk (Ms. Kennedy), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guest: None 1. Election Process Mr. Harmening stated that the council has discussed the topic of Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) on numerous occasions and at the end of their last discussion on June 5, 2017 council asked staff to bring back an outline of the steps involved to change current election administration processes in time for the next municipal election in 2019. He noted if this was something that the council wanted to pursue further, the next step would be to take the item to the Charter Commission for a recommendation. Councilmember Brausen stated he assumes that the preference would be to amend the Charter by ordinance, similar to the process that was followed with the last amendment to eliminate primary elections. He noted that staff has examples from other communities that conduct RCV elections and asked if a procedure could be developed similar to those. Councilmember Sanger stated that the process that is followed will drive the timing. She asked if the council directed the Charter Commission to make a recommendation, if staff would develop an ordinance of procedures and then send it back to council for a final vote. Ms. Deno stated that council must first decide if they want the Charter updated to allow for the use of RCV in municipal elections. Mr. Mattick added that if the Charter Commission makes a recommendation to move forward, which would require 8 votes, the council can proceed with a public hearing on a draft ordinance to amend the Charter. He noted that a unanimous vote of the council would be required to amend the Charter by ordinance. If the vote is not unanimous, the council would still have the opportunity to put a question on the November, 2018 ballot. Councilmember Miller asked about timing and how long the Charter Commission could take to make a recommendation. Ms. Kennedy stated that the commission has 60 days to consider the council's request, but by statute can vote to extend that timeline up to an additional 90 days. Mayor Spano stated that RCV will change the way the city conducts local elections and asked if this is a decision the council is comfortable making on their own, with direction from the Charter Commission, or if it should go on a ballot as a question to voters. Councilmember Sanger stated she does not want it put it on a ballot, noting that the community elects the council to make governance decisions. She added that the public trusts the council to make good decisions because they are the one that have researched and discussed the use of Special Study Session Minutes -2- September 18, 2017 RCV. She referenced California and stated their elections have become chaotic because of so many ballot questions. She added that if the question goes to a public vote, the process is delayed. Councilmember Brausen agreed with Councilmember Sanger, noting that there will be a new council next year, and it would be unfair to assume how new members would vote. He added there will be opportunity for a robust public process at that time. Councilmember Mavity agreed with Councilmember Sanger, stating that she would like to start the timeline for the Charter Commission review as soon as possible in order to have time to consider other options, if necessary. She added that she wants to be cautious in case the council is not in unanimous agreement. Councilmember Hallfin noted the staff report, which sated that other communities such as Aspen, Colorado, and Burlington, Vermont, adopted RCV for two years, and then returned to the traditional runoff system. He stated that he is curious why they repealed it, adding that he likes the concept of RCV in principle but not in practice, given what he has seen in Minneapolis elections in terms of the lack of serious candidates filing for office. Councilmember Sanger stated that the city cannot control who files for office, adding that St. Louis Park has had issues in the past with people who file for office and are not serious candidates. She added that the staff list of cities that have adopted RCV is incomplete and should also include Santa Fe, Memphis, and Sarasota. Ms. Kennedy stated that staff was asked to provide a list of cities that have actually used RCV in their elections. She noted there are other cities have adopted RCV legislation, but have not used it in an election. Councilmember Sanger stated that she hopes this process can move quickly and, if feasible, be brought to a vote this year. Councilmember Hallfrn noted he is not to saying that he would vote against implementing RCV, only that he was not sold on the concept based on what he saw in Minneapolis. Councilmember Sanger stated that in the last election for Minneapolis Mayor, 35 people filed, and they made RCV work. She pointed out that data showed the majority of voters did rank their first 3 choices, and a survey afterward showed the vast majority of voters were satisfied with RCV. Councilmember Mavity stated that it seems we have a majority of the council who would like to recommend RCV to the Charter Commission, adding that she would like to make the recommendation with clear language that indicates the majority will of the council to move forward with RCV and that outlines a timeline for a Charter Commission recommendation to come back to council. She suggested that staff come back at the next regular meeting with language that is strong enough for the Charter Commission to move forward. Mayor Spano asked if the council is directing the Charter Commission to make a recommendation on a process to move forward. Mr. Mattick clarified that Councilmember Mavity wants the Charter Commission to make a recommendation to move forward with RCV and propose an ordinance to amend the Charter for Special Study Session Minutes -3- September 18, 2017 council consideration. He reiterated that with this process, there would need to be a unanimous vote from the council to amend the Charter by ordinance. Mr. Harmening suggested adopting a resolution that clearly states what the council is asking the Charter Commission to consider. He noted at this point the council cannot assume there will be a unanimous vote to amend the Charter. Councilmember Mavity stated that she would like the language to be clear and not open ended regarding the adoption of RCV. Councilmember Sanger suggested that staff draft a resolution for consideration at the next regular meeting. She offered to assist in drafting the resolution. Mayor Spano stated that he would also like to provide input on the resolution to be sent to the Charter Commission. He added that he feels the public would want to have a direct voice in the decision on how to elect their mayor and council and he has heard from a number of people both in support of and against the use of RCV. Councilmember Miller stated every resident he has heard from is in support of RCV. He stated that there is no need for listening sessions and does not find it more complicated than the decision to eliminate the Primary Election. Mr. Mattick clarified that if there are not 8 affirmative votes on the Charter Commission, and/or the vote from the council is not unanimous to approve the Charter amendment, the only other way forward is to put a question on the ballot. Ms. Deno stated that the resolution requesting the Charter Commission to provide recommendations on amendments to the charter will come before the council at the October 2 regular city council meeting. The meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m.